Hi Rimas:
The WG considered your LC comment and has chosen to clarify that the message property
"[destination]: IRI (mandatory)" will be replaced by
"[destination]: IRI (1..1)" where (x..y) is short for minOccur=x and minOccur=y.
In other words, there is only one [destination] property associated with a message.
At the same time, the WG has also decided to make the same change to
"[action]: IRI (mandatory)" replacing it with
"[action]: IRI (1..1)".
Please let the WG know if this does not address your concern - within two weeks, please,
Thanks,
Nilo
(on behalf of the WS-A WG)
Nilo Mitra
Ericsson, Inc.
desk: +1 212-843-8451
mobile: +1 516-476-7427
> When I read the Last Call Working Draft [1] of the Web Services Addressing
> 1.0 - Core specification, I see that the cardinality indicator associated
> with the "[destination]" property in section 3. Message Addressing
> Properties [2] is "(mandatory)". Unfortunately, I do not see a definition
> of "(mandatory)" anywhere in the same document (I even checked RFC 2119
> [3]). So, while I would doubt that anyone would argue about associating
> minOccurs=1 to the term, it is less clear what value of maxOccurs to
> associate. I can see arguments for both one and unbounded. So...
>
> (1) What did the authors intend for the meaning of "(mandatory)"?
>
> (2) If the intent was in fact maxOccurs=unbounded, could you help me to
> understand the use cases behind the intent? I have some ideas, but I am
> sure that the authors must have more.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rimas V. Rekasius
> e-business Industry Standards Architect
> 1-312-245-6775 (voice/FAX)
> 1-773-934-2705 (cell phone)
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-core-20050331/ <http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-core-20050331/>
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-core-20050331/#msgaddrprops <http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-core-20050331/#msgaddrprops>
> [3] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt>